John Locke's Empiricism

765 Words4 Pages
John Locke’s version of empiricism begins with his propositions on the certainty and the extent of human knowledge by refuting the idea that human beings are born with certain ideas and principles already in their minds. Locke argues against these ideas and then represents his own theory about the origins of knowledge. Locke believed that each and every person was born with a “clean slate” or “Tabula Rasa”. He believed that we learn through perception, sensation, and most importantly experience. I agree with Locke that we most definitely learn through these things and I would also argue that experience is one of the most fundamental and crucial aspects of our gained knowledge, but to say that we can only learn through it is not accurate. Locke says that everything in our mind is an idea, and that each and every idea arrives in our mind in one of two ways; either the idea comes in through the senses, or it comes in through the mind's reflection. Locke classified ideas into two basic types; the simple and the complex. According to Locke, “knowledge is the perception of strong internal relations that hold among the ideas themselves, without any reference to the external world.” Locke also states that there are four ways to relate our ideas that count as knowledge; identity/diversity, relation, coexistence, actual existence. Locke also believes that knowledge is attained at certain levels; there are different degrees to which knowledge is at its best. These levels of knowledge are intuition as the highest, demonstration as a middling level, and sensitive knowledge. What Locke represents is not entirely false, his ideas seem logical and are definitely to be considered, but is impossible to say that by these means alone people are as knowledgeable as they are, there are just too many gaps that need to be filled in in order for these ideas to be considered true. There
Open Document